No plants can be used when calculating light trespass or uplight. This has been a long standing ruling from USGBC since they consider plants as not permanent.

Any permanment structure in the project can be considered in the site lighting model to mask or shield light to help meet the light trespass requirements. Solid walls work well. You may need to explain any mask used in the model. They may ask for additional information.

Thanks a lot for these explanations and confirmation.

Your buildings should already have automatic light shutoff from EAp2.

If the canteen building is separate and less than 5,000 sf then it is exempt from the requirements of automatic light shutoff in EAp2. But since you want to earn this Credit it specifically says in Option 1 that interior lighting needs automatic reduction by at least 50%.

If the product buildings are normally occupied between 11pm-5am then automatic shutoff is not enough. (The sensor will alsways see motion and always keep the lights on.) You will either need to reduce the power to the lighting by 50% or automatically cover the windows where any lights are visible from outside.

Thank you. The production closes at 4.30pm. So it is not going to be operating after 5pm. But the canteen area is little over 5000 sq.ft and that means it is not exempted from having the automatic shut off system.

Thank you again.

http://www.energycodes.gov/sites/default/files/becu/extlighting.pdf

I did a quick web search and it seems to be treated as an interior covered parking space for LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space. calculations. Think of it like the lower levels of a parking garage which are open on the sides.

Tristan,

Can you ask the GBCI about when they recinded this? I have a version 4.0 form in LEED Online now that provides this exception. Is it only true for those of us who registered hospital projects between certain dates? Can I submit this credit for review with this form and have it be accepted?

Susan

I've been wondering about where this exemption came from. It just showed up in the Online form.

For the revolving door I would look at the narrowest opening. Usually there is some curved glass on the sides of the revolving door that limits the area someone can enter the door at. If the diameter of the revolving door is 6'-6", the opening people can enter thru may only be 4'-4" wide. I'd use the opening width in my calculation.

If the walkway is next to the canopy as you state then your calculation sounds right. But you forgot to add the site allowance per addendum i. (600W for a LZ2 site) Any of the walkway that is directly under the canopy should not be counted.

Not sure what you are asking. Are you saying that you don't have any exterior fixtures, either site or building mounted, within the LEED Project Boundary? If that is the case, then it seems to me all you have to do is meet the interior requirements of the credit.

I guess I am asking if we don't put any exterior fixtures on a project within the boundary than do we get points for light pollution reduction? Do we also not have to do a photometric analysis of exterior lighting? We feel the project benefits from lighting poles in a nearby parking lot that make it unnecessary to add additonal fixtures on the exterior just fot the look of them. We could do without them we think but worry about what impact that will have on the LEED credits.

If you can design the project without any exterior lighting within the LEED boundary, then you are fine. From a light pollution control perspective, this is ideal. Isn't there a check box on the submittal form for "no exterior lighting"? So you would check that and no calculations would be required.

Now with that said, I imagine that this isn't very common and a GBCI reviewer may want to make sure you are not gaming the system. If I were the reviewer I'd want to have confidence you aren’t doing one of two things:
1. Not installing any exterior lighting, but you intend to add it after the project is certified.
2. You have some influence over the area outside the LEED project boundary and someone is installing lighting just outside the boundary to light your project site.

So I’d probably write a narrative with some explanation of your atypical situation, saying that yes, really, we don’t have any exterior lighting and we don’t need any.

How you light your site is your design decision. If you decide that you don’t need any lighting, and that decision is based in part on some existing lighting off-site, I think that is and defensible decision and your call, not USGBC’s.

I am curious though, how are you lighting your exit discharge to meet egress/emergency code requirements? Usually that is done with building exterior fixtures.

Still workling on an answer to your comments. I may have some exit lights so as I get more data I will respond. Thanks for your assistance.

hello again
after some discussion with my team we are setting ths site boundary around our new construction and the existing site lighting will not fall within that. We are proposing exterior fixtures only for emergency use by setting fixtures at exit with motion sensors so that they only come on if someone exits through one of these stair tower exit doors. Those are the only exit doors. We also have an outside patio that we intend to do the same - motion sensor. So doing a photometric for one light fixture seems silly. Is it really needed are is there another way to address this so that we get credit for low or non-lighting on the site pollution credit.

Robert,
Putting the new emergency egress fixtures on motion sensors does not exempt you from the requirements of this credit. There are some previous interpretations (LI) by people attempting this that were rejected.

All exterior lighting fixtures within the project boundary (New and existing) must comply with the credits requirements and do a lighting calculation to show compliance. They seem to like blanket rules to apply to all. If an exception is made for a person with 1 light at an exit 50' from the property line then another person want an exception for 2 lights at 30' from the property line. So they make everyone do the same effort to show compliance.

DANDY. Oh well. Nice try.

The need for a photometric calculation should not block you from attempting this credit. There are free programs available. Site plans are much easier to do than interior plans. You don't even need to draw a wall. I can walk you thru the program on this forum.

For an LZ2 type facility:

I read that the hours from 11pm to 5 am are of concern. If our facility does not operate during those times do we need to be concened with SSC8 credit regarding light pollution from interior spaces. Window controls and lighting controls would not be as important. We will have vacancy sensors on all interior lights where glass is provide on the facade.

That being the case it would seem all we need be concerned with for exterior lighting for portion of this credit is facade lighting (wall washers at egress). So using Option 2 we have no concerns due to time of occupancy. Correct?

If the facility is not normally used between 11pm and 5am you should be fine with the interior portion of SSc8. EAp2 already requires most spaces to have some form of automatic shut off for the lighting. Just make sure that for your project any space with windows to the outside has occupancy sensors or a lighting relay panel programmed to be off between 11pm and 5am. Then you will comply with Option 1 for turning off at least 50% of the lighting.

I'm not understanding your last question. Exterior lighting is a separate issue than interior lighting. There is no time of use listed in the exterior portion of this credit. If you have wall washers over the egress doors then you need to be concerned about lighting power density, uplight, and spill light at the site boundary.

Yes I understand the exterior is differently addressed. LPDLighting power density (LPD) is the amount of electric lighting, usually measured in watts per square foot, being used to illuminate a given space. allows us however tradeoffs for exit doors, stairs, and overhangs. Can you explain how to use those tradeoffs.?
All we have on our exterior is exit doors, stairs, and overhangs. No other lighting on the extierior.
What do we do with that?

If you have ever done the 90.1 space-by-space calculation for interior lighting then you understand tradeoffs. You can be high in one space as long as your are low enough somewhere else. Think of it like a budget. Add up the allowed watts for each space listed in the tradable surfaces category.

Here's a made up site for an example.
Start with the 600W per Addendum i
A 30,000 sf parking lot, add 1,800W
50 foot long sidewalk, add 35W
Main entrance 6' wide, add 120W
One side egress door 3' wide, add 60W
Total tradable allowance equals 2,615W

If this project had (8) 250W MH fixtures in the parking lot, with ballast this would total about 2,160W. This is above the 1,800W for the parking lot. But that doesn't matter because you are still below the 2,615W for the site as a whole. There is still another 455W available for adding lights above the doors or anywhere else on the site.

If I'm adding a light above a door for egress lighting then I don't consider it facade lighting and only use the 20W/foot of door width in the calculation. 60W per door is generous and easy to find a light that fits this budget.

If your site has very limited lighting as you describe, there is nothing preventing you for using parking and sidewalk in adding up your budget. For facade lighting, which is non-tradable, the wall has to be illuminated to be counted in the budget.

I have not done it. Thus my dumb questions. All we have is the lights at the locations described - no parking lot. no poles, no facades. None of those are planned or needed and will not be in our LEED Boundary, although there is parking lot poles serving parking that is outside our boundary. We are doing an addition project with limited exterior effects.

So what are we "trading"? Your example is way more than I think we will need to consider and that is my question. With only limited exterior lights at exit doors, stairs, and overhangs that is all I have. No sidewalks, no walkways, just grass around the addition.

Addendum i is not to be used as I understand it. Only 90.1 without addendums I thought.

I see my limits as 60 w for exits doors, 60 w for stairs (not sure how that is applied for landings, and 60 w for overhangs. Do we need to trade anything for these wattages. Not sure I get it.

Any project registered after 11/1/2011 has to comply with Addendum i per the addenda issued on that date. If you look in the current credit language online you will see it mentioned. (I think this changed violates USGBC rules about changing credits but that's what they are enforcing.)
http://www.usgbc.org/Docs/Archive/General/Docs10508.pdf

The "trade" is watts. It may be a poor choice of word but you'll get used to it over time. I like to think of it as a budget (of watts) that I spend as I add lights. Don't get focused on the word used. Just follow the instructions and pracitce will help a lot.

Let me try to guess your project's details. Assuming you were registered after November 1 of 2011.
Base allowance for LZ2 site = 600W
One main entrance 6' wide = 120W
One side entrance 3' wide = 60W
Stairs with 60 sq ft of area = 60W
Canopy over the doors 240 sq ft of area = 60W
Total wattage allowed for site lighting = 900W

As long as your site lighting wattage totals less than 900W you are compliant. If you only use (2) 70W fixtures over the doors, (2) 100W fixtures by the stairs, and (4) 35W fixtures in the canopy then you've only used 480W. Well below your allowed limit of 900W for the site.

Is the project and LEED for Schools project? You say it is a AAA ball park. That doesn't sound like a school.

Im asking if you can exclude the sports feild lighting for a triple A ballpark, the same way you are aloud to if it were a school. No my project is not a school. I would think you would beable to. The feild would be used 72 days out of the year for 4 hour max. Lights would only be on should the games take place at night.

Are you trying to get meet the EA requirements on exterior lighting power density, or the light pollution credit requirements, or both?

Regarding the lighting power density for EA, I don't know why you think you have to include the sports field lighting equipment power in your lighting power density calculations. This lighting is exempted in 90.1-2007, 9.4.5 Exception "e." "Lighting for athletic playing areas". I think that the statement in the LEED for Schools Light Pollution credit regarding lighting power density for Sports Field Lighting is just a repeat for clarification of what is in 90.1-2007 as required by EA credits, and is redundant.

If you are trying to get the light pollution credit, the special trespass limits for Sports Field lighting only exists in LEED for Schools. So if you aren't a LEED for Schools project, I don't see how you could take it. But I suppose you could try.

Im going after both credits but by question is regarding the light pollution credit. Our team will atempt to meet the credit.

Thank you for your help.

renee,
I'm curious why you think the sports field lighting is ‘a special feature area’? I ask because you are the second person to say this so far this year and I've never heard this question before. Is there some person or website stating this?

As Glenn said, the power for sports lighting is exempt per ASHRAE 90.1 for both this credit and the EA credits.

As I said a couple months ago to the other person asking this question.
"3) Your big problem that you may not realize yet is the spill light and uplight from these floodlights are not exempt. Pilot Credit #7 used to allow athletic lighting to be exempt but they keep changing the wording and it is now no longer listed as an exemption."

So Bill, if I understand you correctly, the sports field lighting should only be modeled to ensure no light trespass at the boundaries.....correct?

Where does this data go in terms of the LEED online template for this credit?

I too chose to include the sports field fixture wattages etc. in the Table SSc8-1. Lighting Power Density For Building Exteriors: Tradable Surfaces or is there another place for this information (Special Circumstances narrative?). However, after your advice above, I will remove it and make a note in the narrative I have written to describe how the calculations were made and the circumstance surrounding them.

We should also note that one of the requirements for this credit is to perform the photometric plan with and without the Sports Field lighting:
"Provide exterior photometric site plans showing the LEED
project boundary and point-by-point footcandle levels (10 ft beyond boundary
for LZ2 and 15 ft beyond boundary for LZ3 and LZ4) under two separate
conditions: 1) with sports lighting turned off and all other site lighting turned on,
and 2) with only sports lighting turned on."

Amit, The sports field lighting should be modeled for light trespass at the boundaries, and for uplight values entered into table SSc8-4 in the online template for this credit.

Adding a note in the narrative sounds good to explain why these lights were not included in Table SSc8-1 but do appear in Table SSc8-4.

-ignore- Where do you see the requirement for two calculations. One with and one without the sports lighting?

Nevermind, I just reread this. I thought it was for schools only. But this is for all sports lighting.

Interesting. All of the value engineering offered by contractors is usually removing LED fixtures. There are a lot of deceptive claims made by some LED sales people. Your site may be darker than you were expecting.

Congrats on gaining this credit. The EAp2 and EAc1 submittals get modified often during the Construction phase as changes are made. The energy model will need to be updated with the new site wattage. It is not likely to change the result.

Thanks for your quick response Bill.

I suspect that you are right about the light levels, to some extent, but I should provide some context for the decision.
1. The site parking is located between two heavily lit streets: a main highway and a main street of the neighborhood.
2. The municipality bought the LEDs for a new neighborhood (where the project is located) so it seems they got a good deal for the bulk purchase and removed the lighting package from the contractor's contract as a result.

I too was pleasantly surprised to visit the site and see that all the fixtures were LED. I'll try to see what they look like at night.

Thanks again for your quick answer.

Bill, is there a resource I could use, for future reference, to better discuss these types of choices with the Lighting Consultant/Clients etc. so that we can have a better conversation when it comes to value engineering luminaires. If I knew what standard light levels were for areas like Parking Lots and Sports Fields etc., I could make a better argument in favor of at least meeting these requirements.

Any help would be appreciated.

The IESNA has a big Lighting Handbook that is the go to for "standard light levels". But experience has a lot of benefit too. Per this handbook they suggest only 5fc in a toilet room. Thru experience I've found people really don't like walking into restrooms that are this dark. The section on exterior lighting is a bit confusing but suggests an average of 1 fc in parking lots with high activity like rest areas. And then a minimum of 0.2 fc at any point for typical conditions or a minimum of 0.5 fc for enhanced security.

There's a whole separate section on sports fields and is dependant on the type of sport and the skill level play. A college football field will get more light than a high school football field. Not mentioned in this section but if they plan to show the game on television you will need a minimum of 100 fc so the cameras can see well.

All of this gets thrown out of the window with LED sales people who claim the light from LED's are brighter. They claim it is unfair to compair lumens of light from an LED to lumens of light from a MH. I think this is as silly as a HVAC contractor claiming a cfm of fresh air from their equipment is better than a cfm of fresh air from their competitor. The city I work in started buying LED lights a few years ago because they want to replace all of their street lights. They bought one from each company and did a one for one replacement down a street so they could compare and see what they did or did not like. They haven't found a light fixture yet they like enough to replace all of the street lights.

Thanks for the references Bill.

I did some research and found some European lighting manufacturer who offered some standards along the lines of what you described: High Level Sports, Low Level, Camera Friendly Sports etc. Here is the link:http://www.abacuslighting.com/guide-to-sports-lighting-levels.asp

I think that the try-before-you-buy strategy, especially for a municipality, is a very good one. But here in this region it is all about first cost, unfortunately. Like I said, at least I can have a better conversation about the requirements for future projects.

I will model the sports field for light trespass and add the data to the section you pointed out.

Thank you very much for your guidance.

It is very difficult.

Check out LI #10114. You can extend the lighting boundary to the centerline of the road.

There are no specific limits to facade lighting. You can add it where you want it for whatever reason you want to add it.

But you still have to comply with the Credit's general requirements for the site. No more than X% of uplight depending on the lighting zone the project is in. And the watts/sf limit in addenda i for facade lighting. The area included is any facade that is illuminated.

Thanks for that information Bill. I still think this is a bit weird as lighting facades does not add to safety or comfort (apart from visual comfort maybe) but the client will be hapy.

Victor
we had a project under LEED NC2.2 in which we used a similar approach. This was rejected by the reviewer with the reason that there is no way to guarantee that the trees would not be removed in the future.

Additionally, Is there an allowance for the entrance driveway area? It needs to be illuminated butis it definately touching the boundary.

Thanks

As deborah mentioned, no. Vegitation of any kind cannot be used as a shield for blocking light when calculating this Credit.

Check out LI #10114. You can extend the lighting boundary to the centerline of the road.

I think I understand what you're asking. The lighting file says the fixture is full cutoffA full cutoff luminaire has zero candela intensity at an angle of 90 degrees above the vertical axis (nadir or straight down) and at all angles greater than 90 degrees from straight down. Additionally, the candela per 1,000 lamp lumens does not numerically exceed 100 (10%) at an angle of 80 degrees above nadir. This applies to all lateral angles around the luminaire. but since you are aiming up at a tree it is no longer limiting uplight as a normal full cutoff fixture and you want to know exactly how much uplight there is when the fixture is aimed up at anywhere from 150 to 180 degrees from nadir.

The easiest thing to do is just use all of the light as uplight in your calculation. Otherwise it is a lot of effort for something that is not likely to change the project being compliant or not. If you really need to save just a few lumens then this is what I suggest. But the light needs to be a symetrical cone output, otherwise the numbers will be meaningless. You need an ies file for the light. Then you can see a detailed output from it by going to this site. http://www.visual-3d.com/tools/photometricViewer/
You'll want to know how much light is in each range. It will look like this.
Lumens Per Zone
Zone Lumens % Total
0-10 186.1 2.5%
10-20 530.8 7.0%
20-30 931.3 12.3%
30-40 1,328.8 17.6%
40-50 1,506.0 19.9%
50-60 1,708.8 22.6%
60-70 1,199.7 15.9%
70-80 170.2 2.2%
80-90 3.0 0.0%
90-100 0 0%
100-110 0 0%
110-120 0 0%
120-130 0 0%
130-140 0 0%
140-150 0 0%
150-160 0 0%
160-170 0 0%
170-180 0 0%

If the light output is a cone shape. To find the uplight when aimed at 150 degrees it will include all of the light from 0-60 and half of the light from 60-90. This give the uplight as 6,878 lumens. Or 90.9% of the total fixture. Like I said, this will not help you much. When aimed at 160 degrees the fixture has 98.9% uplight. Then use 100% uplight when aimed at 170 or 180 degrees.

Unfortunately this credit does not care what the ambient light is next door. They have slowly been extending the lighting boundary into streets that run next to the site but there are no extra allowances for places like parking lots.

I agree, it does not make sense to create dark patches at each property line. Try to comment in a few years when the next version of LEED is rolled out.

Is the part of the parking lot that is outside the LEED project boundary part of the same property, or a property owned by the same owner? If so, then you can use the "lighting boundary" (property line) to make the trespass calculations but only using the exterior fixtures that are within the LEED project boundary. See LEED InterpretationLEED Interpretations are official answers to technical inquiries about implementing LEED on a project. They help people understand how their projects can meet LEED requirements and provide clarity on existing options. LEED Interpretations are to be used by any project certifying under an applicable rating system. All project teams are required to adhere to all LEED Interpretations posted before their registration date. This also applies to other addenda. Adherence to rulings posted after a project registers is optional, but strongly encouraged. LEED Interpretations are published in a searchable database at usgbc.org. #10236
http://new.usgbc.org/node/1730917?view=interpretations

Thanks for your insight Bill.
Glenn, the parking lot outside the leed boundary is NOT property of the owner. But he will use it in addition to the parking inside the LEED boundary. And he wil be the main user of the external parking lot. Which by the way makes me wonder if we could include the external parking in the project LEED boundary since it does have a supporting function for the building although it is not property of the owner.

The Football pitches are not considered "a Special feature area". They are athletic playing areas and are exempt as you noted. There is no way it would comply as you've found.

Any additional lighting you add not intended for the playing field will need to be counted in your power density calculation.

1) It doesn't matter when the project was registerd. This exemption has been in ASHRAE for awhile.

2) Yes. The EAp2 energy simulation uses ASHRAE also.

3) Your big problem that you may not realize yet is the spill light and uplight from these floodlights are not exempt. Pilot Credit #7 used to allow athletic lighting to be exempt but they keep changing the wording and it is now no longer listed as an exemption.

Thank you for your feedback.Great Help!

I would say all exterior lighting on the campus must comply with LEED requirements to earn the campus credit. Even any exterior lighting on or around the non-compliant building. But if you can't meet the interior requirements for that one building then it shouldn't hurt the other 3 from earning the credit. But I can't find any offical rule stating this. Do your best when submitting. Read thru this a couple of times and the links. https://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=10486

From the FAQ:
"Can I exclude buildings from my LEED campus boundary?
The LEED campus boundary may include projects for which LEED certification has not/will not be pursued. However, please note that all campus features and infrastructure within the campus boundary should be considered when documenting the campus credits. For instance, when documenting SSc7.1 Heat Island EffectHeat island effect refers to the absorption of heat by hardscapes, such as dark, nonreflective pavement and buildings, and its radiation to surrounding areas. Other sources may include vehicle exhaust, air-conditioners, and street equipment. Reduced airflow because of tall buildings and narrow streets exacerbate the effect. Non-roof as a campus credit, the project team is required to include all campus features and hardscapeHardscape consists of the inanimate elements of the building landscaping. Examples include pavement, roadways, stone walls, concrete paths and sidewalks, and concrete, brick, and tile patios. within the campus credit calculations, including those associated with the buildings for which LEED certification will not be pursued. See the AGMBC document for additional details."

Anyone?

This is still not clear. They have exempted Residential spaces (dwelling units only) but I have not heard if hotel rooms are considered residential or dwelling. Searching the GBCI data base, the word "hotel" never shows up in the SSc8 topics.

I don't think it helps answer this question, but the hotel building would be considered a commercial building type.

I'll try to get some more feedback on this question.

It's still pretty new so I'm not used to going there, but I realized you should check GBIG. It should show you any buildings that have achieved SSc8. Unfortunately I don't see a way to search within these results for keywords like 'hotel." I've queried USGBC about that functionality.

I went into GBIG another way and found how to sort certified projects by a keyword ("hotel") and show whether they earned SSc8. In NC v2.2, 19 projects did, but 0 so far in LEED 2009. Not sure if this helps you, but it was interesting to use GBIG in this way.

Thanks for pointing this out Tristan.

"Activites / Certifications" field is where we can filter the Rating version, Certification level, and Awarded Credits. This may want to get renamed because it does not inform me of the options inside.

The whole "Activities" category is confusing in general. Why does a search for the word "Hotel" return 1,055 Activities but zero Buildings. Does Activity mean the event of the building earning certification?

The use of the word "Collections" is also confusing.

Bill,

Did you get a final answer on whether hotels where excempt for this lighting calculation? I have a mixed use hotel/residential and want to know if I can achieve this credit,